From Creation to Co-creation : Leibniz, Kuki and Nakai

ソウゾウ　カラ　キョウソウ　ヘ　ライプニッツ　クキ　ナカイ　ノ　テツガク　カラ

オダ, カズアキ

Oda, Kazuaki

オオサカ　ダイガク　ニンゲン　カガク　ケンキュウカ　フゾク　ミライ　キョウソウ　センター

G. W. ライプニッツ

九鬼周造

中井正一

Co-creation

G. W. Leibniz

Kuki Shūzō

Nakai Masakazu

“Best of all possible worlds"

Contingency

Encounter

Beauty

Collective subject

Technic

Research Article

特集１ : 共創・共創知とはなにか

In the philosophical academy, talk of creativity has tended to focus on the individual. I would like to argue for a shift of emphasis to co-creation—the sustained, collaborative effort of a number of people concentrated on a common task. I begin by contrasting the views of G. W. Leibniz and Kuki Shūzō. In his Théodicée, Leibniz lays out his paradigm of creation as an almighty God fashioning the “best of all possible worlds.” Despite all the unhappiness in our lives, from God’s point of view, the world could not be better than it is. The idea of God responding to the pleas of human beings to improve their lives, or of human beings affecting the workings of divine providence, is alien to his way of thinking. Kuki, in contrast, sees the idea of God creating a perfect world is fundamentally flawed, because creation, by its very nature, is contingent and imperfect. The most one can expect from the divinity is to sympathize with human beings in their lot; to change it is beyond even the reach of God. Our pursuit of happiness begins by resigning ourselves to contingency and creating what beauty we can. Although stressing the social nature of the individual, the idea of collaboration in the creation of beauty does not figure in his idea of “encounter with the other.” Nakai Masakazu approaches the question from the opposite end of the spectrum. In place of the solitary individual, he begins from what he calls “the collective subject.” True creativity is grounded, he argues, not in the extraordinary genius of a single person but in collaborative performance, and this requires concerted efforts to organize people into creative units that can hold their own against rugged individualism and totalitarian fascism alike. I am persuaded that his concept of the collective subject can guide us toward a more comprehensive philosophy of co-creation.